Ram dually vs Ford dually Frame Flex Comparison

Fords take a lot of abuse and keep on working!

Hannibal wrote:

Flashman wrote:

Hannibal wrote:
Has anyone here or anywhere had trouble with their tailgate because Ford uses a C channel chassis? I've never heard anyone complain of this other than some goons on a Youtube video deliberately trying to damage a truck. I'm more concerned about the Ram's crappy little dried up ball joints and iffy AAM rear axle than I am about a tried and proven C channel chassis that can be flexed if loaded to the max and driven up on properly placed offset ramps as if that's normal every day occurrences.

Why yes.

Driving a heavy loaded 3/4 Ford through some blow sand (following a Dodge) I got stuck and the frame tweaked sideways and lengthways. I could not open the door and had to climb out the window - the tail gate was jammed shut so hard that it would not open.

The Dodge backed up and pulled me out.

Hopefully you followed him on down to the Dodge shop and replaced it with a Dodge.:C

Was'nt my truck - it was part of a Federal truck pool.

Flashman wrote:

Hannibal wrote:
Has anyone here or anywhere had trouble with their tailgate because Ford uses a C channel chassis? I've never heard anyone complain of this other than some goons on a Youtube video deliberately trying to damage a truck. I'm more concerned about the Ram's crappy little dried up ball joints and iffy AAM rear axle than I am about a tried and proven C channel chassis that can be flexed if loaded to the max and driven up on properly placed offset ramps as if that's normal every day occurrences.

Why yes.

Driving a heavy loaded 3/4 Ford through some blow sand (following a Dodge) I got stuck and the frame tweaked sideways and lengthways. I could not open the door and had to climb out the window - the tail gate was jammed shut so hard that it would not open.

The Dodge backed up and pulled me out.

Hopefully you followed him on down to the Dodge shop and replaced it with a Dodge.:C

Hannibal wrote:
Has anyone here or anywhere had trouble with their tailgate because Ford uses a C channel chassis? I've never heard anyone complain of this other than some goons on a Youtube video deliberately trying to damage a truck. I'm more concerned about the Ram's crappy little dried up ball joints and iffy AAM rear axle than I am about a tried and proven C channel chassis that can be flexed if loaded to the max and driven up on properly placed offset ramps as if that's normal every day occurrences.

Why yes.

Driving a heavy loaded 3/4 Ford through some blow sand (following a Dodge) I got stuck and the frame tweaked sideways and lengthways. I could not open the door and had to climb out the window - the tail gate was jammed shut so hard that it would not open.

The Dodge backed up and pulled me out.

My 1979 Ford flexed so much the doors as well as the tailgate were tweaked.

Surprised they aren't any better 35 years later.

MM49 wrote:
This is a very simple topic. It is amazing the wizards on this site don't understand it. More frame flex = poorer steering geometry. The trucks will steer themselves on a cambered road when loaded. The heavier the load, the more flex, the more self-steering..........
The trucks with the stiffer frames will force the suspension to move. The suspension will control wheel alignment within the limits of the design. The reason the OTR trucks flex the frame is because the suspension is stronger than the frame. This is not the case in light duty trucks.
The goal is the stiffer frame and better steering geometry. It will never be perfect.
MM49

How refreshing; someone that knows something about suspension and frames on this site. :)

Anytime you have the frame work as a suspension component that is bad news.

Kenneth, just in case you missed the link earlier.

Hannibal wrote:

Cummins12V98 wrote:
Well let's make sure that everyone that says the old school frame Ford has now is the best will remember this post when the new Ford comes out as rigid as the RAM.

I didn't like when Chrysler did it to the Ram and I'm not looking forward to Ford doing it with the SD. Didn't care for the AAM rear axle after years of Dana axles either. But, cheaper's better.

I was concerned about the AAM axles but they seem to be holding up.

This is a very simple topic. It is amazing the wizards on this site don't understand it. More frame flex = poorer steering geometry. The trucks will steer themselves on a cambered road when loaded. The heavier the load, the more flex, the more self-steering..........
The trucks with the stiffer frames will force the suspension to move. The suspension will control wheel alignment within the limits of the design. The reason the OTR trucks flex the frame is because the suspension is stronger than the frame. This is not the case in light duty trucks.
The goal is the stiffer frame and better steering geometry. It will never be perfect.
MM49

Just can't see this flex issue being a big deal. Over many years of farming we've pulled through ever kind of ditch out there. I've never had a frame issue by pulling through the ditches. I've owned Chev, Dodge and Ford. When I finally went to Ford SD, my repairs went way down. Today I'm on my 5th Ford SD.

Hannibal wrote:
Wow! Glad you were ok. At least I hope you were. I'm surprised the GM suffered any damage at all. They probably buffed it out when they got it home.

Looks like that Chevy's chrome plastic bumper caps didn't get scratched.